“Without God there could be no atheists. ” G.K. Chesterton

Wow that ad is almost comedy. That flyer on the other hand is disturbing. Basically it seems to imply that good christians should vote only on three issues: abortion, euthanasia and gay marriage. I hope that at least one or two christians out there are smart enough to see through this transparent attempt to claim that good christians can only vote for McCain.

The worst thing is that nowhere in the bible is abortion mentioned. Aside from the absurdity of using rules from thousands of years ago to affect modern law, you would think they would go with something specifically from the bible. Like making blasphemy illegal. I would oppose that, but at least it would make sense.

In fact, Exodus 21:22 specifically claims that abortion is NOT murder, assigning a just a fine for causing a miscarriage and death for murder. Maybe that’s because the fundy version of the bible (new international version) says “give birth prematurely” rather than miscarriage.

First Catholic President: 1960
First divorced President: 1980
First black President: 2008 (tbc)
First atheist President: 2322 (Note: Assassinated by the Gravitron Pope.)

I think that’s what made me the most mad about the Obama = secret Muslim meme.

As practically atheist, I *never* get to vote for someone with the same beliefs as me and it pisses me off that many Christians think that they are the only people possibly worthy of being in charge of things. I learned a long time ago that *gasp* people with different religious beliefs as mine can be good people and worthy of my votes, but their privilege affords them the right to ignore that particular life lesson.

Preach it, sister!

I don’t get why some religious people go so nuts over atheists. It’s not like there are so many of us that we’re a real political threat or anything.

You would think that if Jesus felt that abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual marriage were more important than feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and peace on Earth, he might have bothered to mention it.  Just once.

From the evidence in the Bible, the only social issue Jesus was opposed to was divorce, so he’d probably be against gay divorce.

The idea of “Godless Americans” becomes slightly more funny if you change the space for a hypen.

Godless-Americans!

It’s not like there are so many of us that we’re a real political threat or anything.

I’m not so sure about that.  There are more American atheists than American Jews, and a lot of (very stupid) people think that Jews pose a political threat to them.  Ditto for gays—there are probably about as many gays as atheists in the US, and there are certainly a lot of morons out there who think gays are a threat to their way of life.

In fact, I would bet money that the reason that conservative/fundamentalist Christians get their panties in a twist about atheists is that they represent the core of a group that, at this point, is probably almost a numerical majority of Americans (and who certainly outnumber fundamentalists)—people who do not formally practice any particular religion or have particularly strong religious beliefs.  If all those people got together, the Christianists wouldn’t have a chance in hell, and they’d be up shit creek if all those folks and the liberal/moderate believers joined forces.  So they divide and conquer by vilifying the atheists, shifting it to “Atheists” and “Everybody Else”, rather than “Crazy Religious Wackos” and “Everybody Else”.

“The worst thing is that nowhere in the bible is abortion mentioned. “

Oh but they infer, you know, God knew you in your mother’s womb. Now, if I’m knitting and you ask me what I’m knitting, I’ll say, “a sweater.” But you and I both know it isn’t really a sweater until I cast off, sew the seams, and attach the sleeves. It is a potential sweater.

And with the largest “Christian” denomination a group of people the fundies don’t consider Christians (Catholics), I imagine they get their knickers in a knot about most subsets. The enemy is everywhere, and in many cases, the enemy is others who do consider themselves Christians but believe that the only two commandments are love God (which I know you guys don’t go for) and love your neighbor.

Excuse me. I have to go get crazy over the Phillies now.

I don’t get why some religious people go so nuts over atheists. It’s not like there are so many of us that we’re a real political threat or anything.

There may be more Atheist-Americans than African-Americans, statistically.  If they started acting cohesively they would constitute a direct and vigorous threat to Christianists and to special the many special favours and benefits for religion in the current tax and governmental structure.  They would also be a threat to the ability of hack politicians to have a convenient “unclean!!!!” scream to distract from their own failed policies, moral-intellectual emptiness and demonstrated incompetence.  This last-mentioned item is probably the most important for the Libby Doles of this world.

Bo - Interestingly, the “I knew you in your mother’s womb” is God speaking to, I think, Jeremiah. God knew J. in the womb because J. was *speshul,* not because he knows all fetuses that way.

I must ardently disagree on rule number 3.

http://www.xkcd.com/400/

Can I still be a devout discoballmousetarian?

Dancinghawk, I had the same thought.  All I need when I’m in the middle of sex is for one of those cheeseball guilty pleasure Bollywood tracks to come on, or maybe some show tunes or something.

Then again, the resulting gigglefest could be kinda cute, if I really trusted my partner not to mock me with any seriousness.

I must ardently disagree on rule number 3.

This is why I create playlists.  Though even with that you have to be careful, because an awful lot of “romantic” songs are depressing breakup songs.

Testify, Amanda!

GO PHILLIES!!!

I have such horrid taste in music that embarrassing songs inevitably find their way into even my most IMS-friendly playlists.  I can’t help it.  I think I forget halfway through what the “snob-worthy” vs. “guilty pleasure” dichotomy is all about and just pick songs I really love.  Forgetting that, while I might think that Eastern European folk is really, really good, other people, well, not so much.

Well, this happy Jew happens to think that Amanda and my husband and other atheists are just fine.

Kthnxbai.

As practically atheist, I *never* get to vote for someone with the same beliefs as me

Sure you do. You just don’t get to know who they are because they have to be in the closet.

You would think that if Jesus felt that abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual marriage were more important than feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and peace on Earth, he might have bothered to mention it.  Just once.

What’s sad is that you, an atheist, understand the underlying message of Christianity better than most self-identified Christians. About the only issue I’d disagree with you on, in terms of whether it’s addressed in the Bible (and specifically by Jesus) or not, is euthanasia. Depending on the circumstances surrounding each case, an act of euthanasia could just be straight-up murder disguised as something a bit more palatable.

(I can understand why some people would choose death as opposed to living on in pain while suffering through the final months of a terminal illness, but good palliative care can make those months worth surviving. If it’s going to be an either/or kind of situation, I’d rather see money funneled into palliative and hospice care than into political propaganda supporting euthanasia – or opposing it, for that matter.)

<blockquote?Interestingly, the “I knew you in your mother’s womb” is God speaking to, I think, Jeremiah.</blockquote>

It’s in Psalm 139 - a claim that God knows everyone in the womb.

iPod on shuffle can also be problematic when you are using it as the soundtrack for your labor and birth. Just saying.

There may be more Atheist-Americans than African-Americans, statistically.

An interesting thought, but I have my doubts. The most authentic-looking stat I could find on the Google was a survey of 50 countries done by one Phil Zuckerman in 2005 for “The Cambridge Companion to Atheism.” This put the proportion of Americans who self-identify as atheists at 3% to 9%. African-Americans constitute about 13% of the U.S. population.

As an atheist, I think abortion IS murder. After month 6, arguably 5. And I think that if there were a god, that is the period when she would be knowing us in our mother’s wombs. Also the period when we, as “children”, would be kicking in our mother’s wombs (the use of the word “child” is another biblical anti-abortion argument that gets used).

I further think that if I could magically make it impossible to have an abortion in month 6 and after, I would. But since I’m an atheist, I have this nasty reluctance to believe in magic solutions. And in real life, most laws against abortion that I’ve ever heard of would/have just lead to more death and suffering. And since basically nobody anywhere agrees with me on this one, it’s kinda hard to hope that they pass the kind of sensible law I’d be looking for - the “free contraception and early abortion and abortion education / illegal late abortion act of 20009”. The closest thing to that kind of law couldn’t possibly come from politics - it could only come from some kind of deliberative process where some people whose job was to impartially “judge” things got to decide, using the case of a real woman - let’s call her “Jane Roe” - as a basis.

I further think that if I could magically make it impossible to have an abortion in month 6 and after, I would.

So you would be able to magically cure all fetuses that formed without brains and prevent fatal chromosomal abnormalities and birth accidents?

That’s some magic world you’ll be living in.  Fortunately for the rest of us living in the real world where unfortunately sometimes pregnancy goes horribly wrong, women are not currently forced to carry doomed fetuses to term just because you find late-term abortion icky.

Thank you Amanda, thank you for putting into words my frustration with the crazy crap we terrible doubters and non-believers have to roll our eyes at privately lest we be attacked as worse than pedophiles and terrorists… like there is something terribly wrong with having doubts about a supreme being, i.e. father figure, watching over us on this big ball of rock in space, but somehow fails to protect us from the predations of all manner of evil that befalls his beloved children millions of times a day.  The devotion to counter-productive political candidates throughout history must tap into the same processes in most people’s mind as does religion. 

Thank you,

Steve

PS I totally copied a part of your post to my blog as you described the crappy and stupid view most Americans have of OMFG, “atheism” better than I could have done.  Hope you don’t mind. 

If I can just jump back to that “Without God there could be no atheists. “ G.K. Chesterton quote for a moment, I’d like to point out how insanely pithy and trite that quote is.  Not to be a logic nerd, but you can’t even make sense of that if you try to break it down.

“Without an entity that lacks proof of its existence, there could be no people who would refute said entity’s existence.”

It’s an inverted uroborous.  My wife and I came up with this parallel example of Chesterton’s quote:

“Without aliens you couldn’t have people who don’t believe in them.”

So, clearly, aliens MUST exist because you have people who deny their existence.

I feel like I’m writing a Douglas Adams novel, suddenly. (see: Babelfish)

In a world where logic is the first thing thrown out the window these days, I hate it when people don’t think about the meaning of their words and of their sentences.  People are so quick to fire off a smarmy little one-liner without thinking how their logic falls apart seconds after someone seriously considers their pithy statement. 

Just my 2¥...

Hmm, LOL Cats ask if they can has cheesburgers. Clearly they are un-Biblical heathen. Maybe that’s why I like them so much.

Seriously, it’s highly likely we have already had at least a few atheist presidents. LBJ for certain and maybe Nixon too. Lincoln, Jefferson, and a few others as well.

But what we really want are openly atheist politicians. And I want them soon enough that there are still enough fundies around that I can hear then wail in pointless rage. I want to see fundies squirm. I want them to scream about their supposed oppression even more than they do now and have it not make a difference. I want their bible school and college educated children to be unable to get good jobs. I want to see Regents University grads stocking shelves at the new secularly oriented Wal-Mart that as hardly any religious books in its book section but has a full endcap filled with the latest bestseller by that venerable sage, Sam Harris. I want the DVD racks stocked with the tenth sequel to “The God Who Wasn’t There”.  I want them to be left behind. That’s the world I hope to live in as an old man.

If it’s going to be an either/or kind of situation, I’d rather see money funneled into palliative and hospice care than into political propaganda supporting euthanasia – or opposing it, for that matter

There’s no reason for it to be either/or.  Nothing wrong with both and let the patients decide for themselves how, or whether, they want to live.

Problem is the conservatives’ efforts lead to neither.  On the one hand, you’ve got “culture of life” phonies preventing anyone from choosing death with dignity.  On the other hand, you’ve got drug warriors preventing doctors from prescribing the necessary painkillers for palliative care without risking their licenses.  End result is that people linger in ever increasing and excruciating pain, and bankrupting their families in the process, just so moral scolds can feel superior.

Fuck.  I don’t want to hate, I really don’t.  But their religious-based ideology put into practice causes so much real suffering, real pain.  And for what?  So they can assuage their guilt over feeling sexy?  What?  My loved ones have to suffer needlessly because they need to prove to each other how much they praise Jesus and fear Satan?  Seriously, wtf?

To be a bit contrarian (but not too much, hopefully), as with all good religions, seems like there is a basic flaw in the oversimplification of one of your beliefs:

““Have you ever considered that if god is all powerful and all good, then there shouldn’t be evil in the world?  So either god is evil, not all powerful, or doesn’t exist. “

There is a fourth possibility. Which is that God exists, but isn’t doing what everyone pretends to believe he is doing. It is true that the people who you would want to tweak with the comment would be just as offended by the fourth option, so you still get to use it to mess with fundie heads.

It is like saying “If our parents loved us, our baseball team would always win, even if they had to screw with the rules.” Only if your parents feel that winning every time is good for you.

Of course, come to think of it, a lot of these wingnuts actually feel that way about God and their baseball teams.

So, feel free to limit your discussion to those three options when fucking with fundies. I’m all for it. But please remember that for many of us, those aren’t the only choices, and for thinking deists, that encounter wouldn’t be the gotcha you think it is.

“Without God there could be no atheists. “ G.K. Chesterton

Well, maybe he meant, if there was no belief in god, then nobody would bother to call themselves an ‘atheist’. If that’s what he meant, then he was correct, if somewhat obvious. He also may have meant, “There is a God, he created everyone including you athiests, so suck it.” If that is what he meant, then please kiss my ass from beyond the grave, G. K. Chesterton.

3) Sex, music, naps, and tasty food. We’re for these things. We fail to understand why people are concerned that their make-believe gods will be displeased if they enjoy themselves.

I am objectively pro-nap.

There is a fourth possibility. Which is that God exists, but isn’t doing what everyone pretends to believe he is doing. It is true that the people who you would want to tweak with the comment would be just as offended by the fourth option, so you still get to use it to mess with fundie heads.

Right, what if God does exist, but is actually a sadist who psychically feeds off of the pain of humans. Like some kind of all-knowing, bloodsucking worm, god sits beyond the cosmos and beyond time, fattening off of the agony of all sentient beings, in the eternal instant before this universe dies and god move on to another meal.

Its something to think about, anyway.

There’s the 10 percent of Americans who self-identify as atheist, but at the very least a third of Americans are *functionally* atheist—they attend church on Christmas and Easter, maybe, but don’t act on their religious beliefs in any other way. But because they still claim to believe in the mystical sky fairy, that makes them much, much better people than those who are honest about religious belief.

Right, what if God does exist, but is actually a sadist who psychically feeds off of the pain of humans. Like some kind of all-knowing, bloodsucking worm, god sits beyond the cosmos and beyond time, fattening off of the agony of all sentient beings, in the eternal instant before this universe dies and god move on to another meal.

Its something to think about, anyway.

That was beautiful.

So, feel free to limit your discussion to those three options when fucking with fundies. I’m all for it. But please remember that for many of us, those aren’t the only choices, and for thinking deists, that encounter wouldn’t be the gotcha you think it is

No offense, but I kind of don’t buy this. I mean, I reject the supernatural, period, so for me it’s not about fundamentalists vs. believers who aren’t assholes, but I still don’t quite get the logic of defending religion from the standpoint of “hey, my faith’s defensible, as it has no binding tenets and makes no falsifiable claims.” I mean, when people talk about God, they’re talking about a specific thing, and that thing is understood to be both omnipotent and “good.”

We should probably spend the bulk of today trying to influence each other’s thinking on this issue.

snip/”*functionally* atheist—they attend church on Christmas and Easter, maybe, but don’t act on their religious beliefs in any other way.\endsnip

Reminds of this little YouTube gem, God, Inc.  “Sort of Christians”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il8XWIi-WPE

If I recall correctly, “sort of Christians” go to church on Christmas and Easter, and get worked up if another religious sect does something crazy, like say a Muslim country invading Canada.

I did a half-assed paper for a sociology class, though using all peer-reviewed journal sources, on atheism in politics. Well, more like quarter-assed, at best. Point is!

Found several interesting things. Fer instance, at the absolute height of McCarthyism, Americans were still more willing to hear public statements from communists than atheists. I wish I could remember the difference, but it was like 25% versus 19%.

America doesn’t care what sky wizard you worship, as long as you do.

Without God there wouldn’t be certain kinds of atheism, that’s for sure. My disbelief in the god described in the episcopalian rubrics and the 1940 hymnal would be impossible. My Laplacian lack of need for that hypothesis, on the other hand, would be utterly intact.

We should probably spend the bulk of today trying to influence each other’s thinking on this issue.

My metaphysics can beat up your metaphysics!

Like some kind of all-knowing, bloodsucking worm, god sits beyond the cosmos and beyond time, fattening off of the agony of all sentient beings, in the eternal instant before this universe dies and god move on to another meal.

You wonder why God the Omnipotent Leech doesn’t get more play in mythology.

white lady with a Texas accent holding a boy’s hand on the bus

C’mon, Amanda, everyone knows if the lady was an atheist, she’d crush his hand in her uncaring grip, and the boy would be growing horns and a tail, and jabbing the passenger in front with his little pitchfork ... just like you see in Noo Yawk all the time ...

Season 1, Episode 1 of the fabulous Ricky Gervais show “Extras”:

a paraphrase:

Q: Do you believe in God?
A: No, I’m an atheist.
Q: Why?
A: (sputters a bit)What do you mean why?  The burden of proof isn’t on me.

It is like saying “If our parents loved us, our baseball team would always win, even if they had to screw with the rules.” Only if your parents feel that winning every time is good for you.

Reminds me of my favorite quote from Anne Lamott:  “You know you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that He hates all of the same people you do.”

“If you could put your religion in the government you would.”

Ugh, god, do people actually think that way?  No.  Theocracy bad.  Theocracy always bad.  I don’t need my religion anywhere near my politics or my science, thanks.

So, feel free to limit your discussion to those three options when fucking with fundies. I’m all for it. But please remember that for many of us, those aren’t the only choices, and for thinking deists, that encounter wouldn’t be the gotcha you think it is

No offense, but I kind of don’t buy this. I mean, I reject the supernatural, period, so for me it’s not about fundamentalists vs. believers who aren’t assholes, but I still don’t quite get the logic of defending religion from the standpoint of “hey, my faith’s defensible”

I agree with the point that religion is religion, whether it’s “moderate” or not.  In fact, the moderate religionists are the problem, not the fundamentalists (as if believing in god isn’t the ultimate fundamental anyway).  If the choice were either fundies or atheism, religion would have died out a long time ago.  Instead we have religious moderates putting lipstick on the pig, telling us that the Bible doesn’t really say what it says, bringing their kids to church and putting money in the collection plate, giving Bibles as gifts, etc.  They are propping up a belief system that would otherwise die a richly-deserved death, and keeping it alive so that new generations of fundamentalists can carry the banner.

There is a fourth possibility. Which is that God exists, but isn’t doing what everyone pretends to believe he is doing.

Sort of like “The Church of God the Utterly Indifferent,” in Kurt Vonnegut’s The Sirens of Titan?

I agree with the point that religion is religion, whether it’s “moderate” or not.  In fact, the moderate religionists are the problem

Wow.  So I’m not oppressing you, I don’t want to oppress you, I don’t want to prolestytize to you or force you or your children to give a crap about what I do privately.  Outside of this comment thread, you would never know I wasn’t an athiest, actually - and I’m the problem?

We might as well ban all liquor because some people are alcoholics.  Oh wait, tried that.

Moderate religion is not a gateway drug.  I’m not going to wake up tomorrow and realize I should join the WBC.  I don’t believe in god to piss you off - it’s as a part of who I am as breathing or walking around, and I could change it about as easily as I could spontaniously change genders.

... and I wish, I wish that it was as easy to solve the problems of the world as getting rid of organized religion, but the people who use God as an excuse for all the ugly things they want to do will spend exactly .5 seconds before finding some other excuse to do all the ugly things they want to do.

Yes, Twig, ezzackly.  Again, I think this stems from the common misconception that there are two choices: monotheism or atheism.

And, before someone jumps in and makes this an IS THERE A GOD OR NOT deathmatch throwdown, I could really care less whether or not other people believe in a deity or not, so don’t think that’s the point - in fact, the fact that I don’t freaking care is the point.  I’m not attacking atheists; I’m asking not to be pushed to the fringes just because the only way I differ from you is that I have faith in something you disagree with.  I really don’t want to start the atheists vs. theists vs. agnostic fight; it’s childish and stupid and does nothing other than feed the PUMA shit by causing us to all point fingers at each other.  I just don’t appreciate being grouped with extremists with whom I share nothing in common aside from a belief in the supernatural.

I’m asking not to be pushed to the fringes just because the only way I differ from you is that I have faith in something you disagree with.  I really don’t want to start the atheists vs. theists vs. agnostic fight; it’s childish and stupid and does nothing other than feed the PUMA shit by causing us to all point fingers at each other.

“Your prophet’s Kung Fu is not strong!”

What are you saying, you don’t think Karl Marx could beat up St. Augustine?

The beard was his secret weapon.

Sorry, I guess that should be Karl Marx versus a Druid

Those sickles are sharp!

Charles Darwin riding one of those Galapagos turtles.

It takes him a while to get to the fight, but when he does, watch out.

Viewed from the outside, the battiest bit about American Christians claiming they are persecuted is them doing this in a country where no national figure whatsoever dare even breathe that (s)he is an atheist.  Think about that: a group more timid and in the closet than gays, and the group that keeps them there thinks that they are the persecuted ones.

To get all serious TWIG, even passive religion is a problem if those religionists aren’t very careful about where that org sends it’s cash.  It also siphons off community activity by channeling it into a church group and dividng said community.  Catholic projects, Lutheran projects, Baptist project all compete with TOWN projects.

America continues to lose civic participation because religion is competing in a time-crunched world.

I’ve heard your alleged Texas accent, and it’s not much of an accent if you ask me. Why is God such a pussy? If he’s offended by anti-God screeds, why isn’t he smiting us atheists? I’ve publicly declared on multiple occasions that there is no God, or if He does exist he’s a fucking asshole, and dared him to smite me. But I’m still here, and He’s still not.

the people who use God as an excuse for all the ugly things they want to do will spend exactly .5 seconds before finding some other excuse to do all the ugly things they want to do

What reason, beside religion, could there possibly be for a Sunni to hate a Shiia, or a Protestant to hate a Catholic, or a Baptist to hate a Jew? 

So I’m not oppressing you, I don’t want to oppress you, I don’t want to prolestytize to you or force you or your children to give a crap about what I do privately.  Outside of this comment thread, you would never know I wasn’t an athiest, actually - and I’m the problem?

Well, not you alone, just the moderates who give life support to a dying belief, keeping it alive long enough for the Pat Robertsons of the world to discover it.  Compare America to Europe:  in the old countries, people got sick of massacres by the latest version of Christianity, and during the Enlightenment basically stopped going to church.  Meanwhile, here in America, we had people like Wesley saying hey, let’s pretend the Bible isn’t the most retrograde work of philosophy ever written and hope for the best!  Keep clapping, everyone, and maybe no one will actually read what it says, and put it into practice!

Go ahead.  Tell yourself that the money you put in the collection plate will somehow—because you aren’t one of those awful fundamentalists—not end up helping a conservative religious figure fight against gay rights.  Tell yourself that bringing your kids to church can not possibly, ever, result in them giving all their money to the latest reincarnation of Jesus and going to live in a compound in Idaho.  After all, the fundamentalists believe in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, the Bible, souls, heaven, hell, and the Rapture, while you only believe in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, the Bible, souls, heaven, and hell, thus making you vastly different.

I’ve publicly declared on multiple occasions that there is no God, or if He does exist he’s a fucking asshole, and dared him to smite me. But I’m still here, and He’s still not.

The fact that he hasn’t smitten you proves nothing, but if something bad does happen to you it proves there is a god.  Remember, religion is highly rational.

Phylosopher, you are still assuming that all theists are Christian.  We’re not.

One day at the zoo, a gorilla and a chipmanzee got into an argument about which was hairier.  Meanwhile, the humans outside the cage just watched and chuckled.

I just don’t appreciate being grouped with extremists with whom I share nothing in common aside from a belief in the supernatural.

How should we group people?  The color of their socks?

Belief in the supernatural is a pretty big thing.  It’s not something to brush aside.  Once someone has crossed the natural/supernatural barrier, the rest is just commentary.

A:  “I believe in an invisible spirit that lives in the sky but listens to us and controls our destiny.”
B:  “Why, that’s just silly!”
A:  “His name is ‘Thor’.”
B:  “Well, that changes everything! ! !”

while you only believe in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, the Bible, souls, heaven, and hell, thus making you vastly different.

How could you possibly know what I believe in?  Even I’m still working on it.

What reason, beside religion, could there possibly be for a Sunni to hate a Shiia, or a Protestant to hate a Catholic, or a Baptist to hate a Jew?

Money.  Power.  Competing for scarce resources. Land.  National pride.  Historical traditions.  “Those People Over there Killed my Great-Great-Great-Great Grandfather,”  Sexual orientation.  “You’re slightly a different color than me.” 

People do cleave to other things besides religion.  Quite often, in fact.

One day at the zoo, a gorilla and a chipmanzee got into an argument about which was hairier.  Meanwhile, the humans outside the cage just watched and chuckled.

Oh woooooowww.  Nothing like being considered subhuman to really brighten up a day.  *thumbs up*

The only way that they can deal with the oppression that they put these people through is by telling themselves that they are that oppressed themselves.

Bingo. That’s why, for instance, a white guy who makes $150,000 a year can say, “Boy, blacks get all the breaks in this country.” It’s a sign of bigotry that the bigoted one thinks the hated group “has it made” or “runs everything.”

about what the Disco Ball thinks of you, because he‘s a fictional character

SEXIST!

What reason, beside religion, could there possibly be for a Sunni to hate a Shiia, or a Protestant to hate a Catholic, or a Baptist to hate a Jew?

Translation: “If religion didn’t exist, people wouldn’t kill each other over religious matters. W00t; I’m the king of tautologies.”

Sorry PAT, but the sort of people who hate each other over religion would simply find some other reason to kill each other if they didn’t have their faith as an excuse – like land, economics, race, gender, and national identity to name but a few.

Belief in the supernatural is a pretty big thing.  It’s not something to brush aside.  Once someone has crossed the natural/supernatural barrier, the rest is just commentary.

It’s strange. Here’s Notorious PAT saying that as soon as a person professes belief in the supernatural, they have crossed into insanity, even if they agree with you on most political things. Then, I have read, from other people who I respect, that they believe any true progressive movement in the USA is actually impossible without the support of religion.

I prefer to split the difference, and accept people as people, with whatever religious identity, or lack thereof, that they choose to profess. I accept them as people who may believe differently from me. Part of this is realpolitik, as atheists are unorganized in this nation and also reviled by many. Part of this is just my temperament. I’m not much of an evangelizer for atheism, though I understand why some people are. I prefer to let people be, treat them with respect.

Right now I’m content to allow the aeons-long discussion/struggle/war between the religious and the atheists to continue as it has been, and instead work on things like trying to end the war and trying to elect good politicians. Maybe at some other time I will see things differently.

Then, I have read, from other people who I respect, that they believe any true progressive movement in the USA is actually impossible without the support of religion.

If that’s me (and if it’s not, then sorry I thought you respected me…::shame:: ), then let me clarify.

I’m not saying it’s impossible without the support of religion; I think religion has zero to do with whether or not people have morals, and I personally don’t think that Deity has any involvement whatsoever in our politics.  I picked a religion that suited my personal morality rather than adjusting to a religion that did not, because I believe in more to existence than what has been proven thus far - otherwise I would be an atheist.  I was saying that no progressive movement can survive here in America without the support of religious people because, whether everyone likes it or not, they outnumber atheists, even, and especially, if one includes those who only are marginally religious and are theist in belief if not practice.  I think religion should not affect political movements aside from being an impetus towards doing good to one another, rather than a means of seeking personal power over others.  I take no issue with Christians who see their faith as a motivation to support programs that help the poor; I take issue with Christians who see their faith as a motivation to tell people what they can and cannot do and to use the government as a mouthpiece.  There’s a difference.  I won’t begrudge Christians their involvement in the progressive movement just because their motivations might be slightly different than mine, the same as I won’t begrudge atheists their part as well.  We are effectively one whole with different backgrounds, and the refusal to see that by Notorious P.A.T. is staggering.

I also wonder if Notorious P.A.T. is voting for Obama, since he’s one of those ignorant theists, or if she/he (gender?) takes issue with the involvement of black churches in civil rights, since religion is, after all, the domain of those with the intelligence of apes.  (Just to clarify, since the proximity of “black” and “ape” is something that tends to be associated either with racism or an accusation of racism, it wasn’t that so much as a reference to a movement where religion was a strong motivator to do good and the comment about watching we apes argue over who is hairier.)

It’s bigotry, plain and simple, and we would do well not to forget that all of us are susceptible to it.  I don’t appreciate it being aimed at me.  Like I said, I didn’t want to start an argument on whether or not there is a god - that argument wouldn’t end and it’s pointless.  I just am very, very tired of being called out on something I have nothing to do with.  I deserve better, and so does every other liberal theist I know.

I prefer to split the difference, and accept people as people, with whatever religious identity, or lack thereof, that they choose to profess

I’m with ya, but I can still be a dick to agnostics, right? They’re God’s undecided voters.

I don’t give a damn whether or not you believe in anything, so why is it any of your business if I or anyone else does, as long as we do the right thing?

Let’s say my neighbor is a white supremacist. But she’s voting for Obama. She hires blacks and hispanics and Jews, and pays everyone equal wages. She invites everyone in the neighborhood to her parties, and tries her best to make everyone feel welcome. She doesn’t decorate with swastikas or Dixie flags, and she wouldn’t be caught dead in a white sheet. Her children have friends of many races and creeds, and they’re all welcome in her home. She donates to UNICEF. To all outward appearances, she’s a good liberal.

She’s teaching her children to “be fair to everyone, because although there’s going to be a race war and the mud people are all going to be killed, it won’t be during your lifetime.”

Does it not matter what she believes?

You are every bit as self-righteous as any one of the fundies if that’s your view

Just once I’d like to see theists go through this discussion without digging to the bottom of the barrel.

Let’s say my neighbor is a white supremacist. But she’s voting for Obama. She hires blacks and hispanics and Jews, and pays everyone equal wages. She invites everyone in the neighborhood to her parties, and tries her best to make everyone feel welcome. She doesn’t decorate with swastikas or Dixie flags, and she wouldn’t be caught dead in a white sheet. Her children have friends of many races and creeds, and they’re all welcome in her home. She donates to UNICEF. To all outward appearances, she’s a good liberal.

She’s teaching her children to “be fair to everyone, because although there’s going to be a race war and the mud people are all going to be killed, it won’t be during your lifetime.”

Does it not matter what she believes?

Grammar, I’m going to go ahead and completely ignore your utter ignorance to what any theology aside from a psychotic monotheistic one (like premillenial dispensationalist Christianity) teaches and reframe your statement in a way that more closely matches that of theist liberals.

Let’s say my neighbor <strike>is a white supremacist</strike> has a second cousin who is a white supremacist. But she’s voting for Obama. She hires blacks and hispanics and Jews, and pays everyone equal wages. She invites everyone in the neighborhood to her parties, and tries her best to make everyone feel welcome. She doesn’t decorate with swastikas or Dixie flags, and she wouldn’t be caught dead in a white sheet. Her children have friends of many races and creeds, and they’re all welcome in her home. She donates to UNICEF. To all outward appearances, she’s a good liberal.

She’s teaching her children to “be fair to everyone, because although my second cousin believes there’s going to be a race war and the mud people are all going to be killed, I’m a rational human being who sees all people as equal, even if my second cousin is an asshat, and I don’t invite him to our family parties anyway because he just gets drunk and starts ranting about the ZOG.”

Does it not matter what she believes?

That’s much closer to what you’re addressing, even if you don’t realize it.  I would also appreciate it if you could explain the tie between white supremacists and all religion ever.  If you want to completely and totally divorce the relevance of theists involved in the progressive movement that’s your problem, but keep your bigotry to yourself, because no one is forcing shit on you, and, if we’re involved in this movement, it’s pretty safe to say that we don’t want to.  Get over your childish need to tell other people what they should and should not believe personally and let’s work together towards a common end, shall we?

Grammar RWA, you probably think you’ve constructed an outlandish figure, don’tcha? Well, change it to a childless male and I totally know that person. Haven’t seen him in years, but being outclassed by a neo-Nazi’s something that sticks with you.

South Carolina: populated exclusively by characters Elmore Leonard wouldn’t have the gall to invent.

Just once I’d like to see theists go through this discussion without digging to the bottom of the barrel.

Says the poster who compared a private belief in a deity to white supremacy theory.

I’d like to see the atheists pull it off once or twice, m’self.

(Atheist here)

I would also appreciate it if you could explain the tie between white supremacists and all religion ever.

Why is logic so hard? You made a blanket statement that behavior was important and beliefs were not. I offered a possible counterexample that would invalidate the generalization. Rather than revise your statement, you demand that I show evidence that liberal theists are morally equivalent to white supremacists, even though I said nothing of the sort, and as yet in this thread have made no moral judgments whatsoever.

I’ll ask again.

Is there anything wrong with the beliefs of the white supremacist who gives to UNICEF?

Grammar RWA, you probably think you’ve constructed an outlandish figure, don’tcha? Well, change it to a childless male and I totally know that person. Haven’t seen him in years, but being outclassed by a neo-Nazi’s something that sticks with you.

No, sadly, I know that person too.

Says the poster who compared a private belief in a deity to white supremacy theory.

I’ll compare it to eating spaghetti, too, and without claiming a moral equivalence.

I’ll never become a right-wing libertarian, but there’s something relaxing about arguing with them instead of fellow progressives. They at least care about logic, even if they fail at it.

You made a blanket statement that behavior was important and beliefs were not.

No, I made a comment within a context.  Perhaps you’re not capable of understanding the difference.

And, again, if you could kindly correlate to me the close ties between all religion ever and white supremacy - because apparently you view all religion ever as being as harmful as white supremacy, to the point of being willing to demean a large portion of the electorate on which you depend and with whom you share most of your important ideological views - I would be most gratified.  Until you can do so, I see no reason why you should insist on being as uninclusive as the most strict of right-wing Christians.  Your strawman is as illogical as you claim my reply to be.

No, I made a comment within a context.  Perhaps you’re not capable of understanding the difference.

Okay, it appears then that your answer is “yes, there can be something wrong with beliefs, in spite of behaviors.”

Yes?

I’ll never become a right-wing libertarian, but there’s something relaxing about arguing with them instead of fellow progressives. They at least care about logic, even if they fail at it.

This was definitely a strawman. I started searching my mind for examples and decided I was full of shit; there’s many logicfree libertarians, and plenty more who are at least as artless as me.

Any believer who doesn’t question the existence of God once in a while isn’t much of a believer. Doubt is part of religious faith.

I started searching my mind for examples and decided I was full of shit; there’s many logicfree libertarians, and plenty more who are at least as artless as me.

Sometimes it seems to me that libertarianism ought to be considered a religion, rather than an ideology.

instead I ask you why you should exclude people from a movement on the basis of private beliefs that either do not affect or positively affect said movement.

You’re putting words in my mouth.

I’ve explained before why I don’t think liberal theists should be given a pass on their theism. All this means is that your ridiculous superstitions are open to criticism. It does not mean that I don’t think you’re a good American, or something like that. The rest of your post is based on attributing stances to me that I’ve never taken, so I’ll ignore it.

The simple question “can there be something wrong with beliefs, in spite of behaviors,” is not a strawman. The obvious answer is yes, as you’ve conceded.